International Journal of


EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
line decor

 Volume 8, Issue 11 (November 2021), Pages: 87-95


 Original Research Paper

 Title: Gender issue in modern education: Theory and practice

 Author(s): Olena Stepanenko 1, *, Kostiantyn Tarasenko 2, Olena Karakoz 3, Tetiana Dolbenko 3, Larysa Markevych 4


 1Department of Social and Humanitarian Education, Communal Institution of Higher Education Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education of Dnipropetrovsk Regional Council, Dnipro, Ukraine
 2Department of Constitutional Law and Human Rights, National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, Ukraine
 3Department of Information Technology, Faculty of Information Technology Law and Cyber Security, Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts, Kyiv, Ukraine
 4Department of Choreography, Faculty of Art and Pedagogical Arts, Rivne State Humanities University, Rivne, Ukraine

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile:

 Digital Object Identifier:


So far, gender inequality in education has been considered in the context of inequality in women’s access to technical specialties, the impact of education on the fertility rate and wages of women, the impact of religious, cultural, social-economic values on women’s education level. However, this concept does little to explain the gender imbalance and low quality of human capital in an environment where women have the opportunity to be educated in any field of knowledge through a feminization in the European countries. The research methodology is based on the correlation analysis of indicators of gender equality in education in Germany, France, Poland, and Ukraine for 1991-2018. The purpose of the study is to identify the trends and dynamics of gender changes in education, the level of gender inequality and establish the causes and effects of gender asymmetry in some European countries. To evaluate gender equality in education, we used the Gender Parity Index. The results of correlation analysis prove the presence of a direct connection between the level of fertility and the Gender Parity Index in the field of primary and higher education, while in the field of secondary education-reverse. Such tendencies are inherent in almost all countries of Europe. The analysis of indicators characterizing the level of education of women within the Eurozone countries shows the decisive role of the structure of the economy and the needs of the labor market in specialists with digital skills and mental abilities. The structure of the economy and the efficiency of various sectors ensure the reduction of gender inequality in education, contributing to overall economic growth and GDP per capita. Political institutions and national policies indirectly influence gender inequality in education by regulating the development of sectors of the economy with different levels of female employment. The proposed paradigm of gender inequality is based on the crucial role of skills, competencies, and abilities regardless of gender. The gender imbalance has been overcome in countries with a high level of women’s competence. Competence is a new paradigm in overcoming gender inequality. 

 © 2021 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (

 Keywords: Gender inequality, Gender imbalance, Paradigm of competence, Paradigm of gender inequality, Gender parity index

 Article History: Received 14 June 2021, Received in revised form 29 August 2021, Accepted 2 September 2021


No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


 Stepanenko O, Tarasenko K, and Karakoz O et al. (2021). Gender issue in modern education: Theory and practice. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(11): 87-95

 Permanent Link to this page


 Fig. 1


 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5    


 References (31)

  1. Becker GS and Lewis HG (1973). On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2, Part 2): S279-S288.   [Google Scholar]
  2. Bertay AC, Dordevic L, and Sever C (2020). Gender inequality and economic growth: Evidence from industry-level data. International Monetary Fund, Washington, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  3. Cooray A and Potrafke N (2011). Gender inequality in education: Political institutions or culture and religion? European Journal of Political Economy, 27(2): 268-280.   [Google Scholar]
  4. Cuberes D and Teignier M (2014). Gender inequality and economic growth: A critical review. Journal of International Development, 26(2): 260-276.   [Google Scholar]
  5. García-Holgado A, Mena J, García-Peñalvo FJ, and González C (2018). Inclusion of gender perspective in Computer Engineering careers: Elaboration of a questionnaire to assess the gender gap in tertiary education. In the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, IEEE, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain: 1547-1554.   [Google Scholar]
  6. Goldin C (2014). A grand gender convergence: Its last chapter. American Economic Review, 104(4): 1091-1119.   [Google Scholar]
  7. Grow A and Van Bavel J (2015). Assortative mating and the reversal of gender inequality in education in Europe: An agent-based model. PLOS ONE, 10(6): e0127806.   [Google Scholar] PMid:26039151 PMCid:PMC4454664
  8. Irmiya RA, Gokas DD, Abisha KT, and Mutkires ND (2019). Survey of gender inequality in education and the role of social studies in nation building. Academic Research International, 10(2): 96-105.   [Google Scholar]
  9. Jayachandran S (2015). The roots of gender inequality in developing countries. Economics, 7(1): 63-88.   [Google Scholar]
  10. Klasen S (2002). Low schooling for girls, slower growth for all? Cross‐country evidence on the effect of gender inequality in education on economic development. The World Bank Economic Review, 16(3): 345-373.   [Google Scholar]
  11. Klasen S and Lamanna F (2009). The impact of gender inequality in education and employment on economic growth: New evidence for a panel of countries. Feminist Economics, 15(3): 91-132.   [Google Scholar]
  12. Kleven H and Landais C (2017). Gender inequality and economic development: Fertility, education and norms. Economica, 84(334): 180-209.   [Google Scholar]
  13. Kleven H, Landais C, and Søgaard JE (2019). Children and gender inequality: Evidence from Denmark. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 11(4): 181-209.   [Google Scholar]
  14. Lagerlöf NP (2003). Gender equality and long-run growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(4): 403-426.   [Google Scholar]
  15. Lišková K, Jarska N, and Szegedi G (2020). Sexuality and gender in school-based sex education in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland in the 1970s and 1980s. The History of the Family, 25(4): 550-575.   [Google Scholar]
  16. Minasyan A, Zenker J, Klasen S, and Vollmer S (2019). Educational gender gaps and economic growth: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis. World Development, 122: 199-217.   [Google Scholar]
  17. Müller U (2007). Between change and resistance: Gender structures and gender cultures in German institutions of higher education. In: Sagaria MAD (Ed.), Women, universities, and change: 23-41. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar] PMCid:PMC1965460
  18. Myers RM and Griffin AL (2019). The geography of gender inequality in international higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 23(4): 429-450.   [Google Scholar]
  19. Riegle-Crumb C (2019). Gender inequality in education: Outcomes and experiences. In: Domina T, Gibbs BG, Nunn L, Penner A (Eds.), Education and society: 41-53. University of California Press, Berkeley, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  20. Tomczak MT (2018). Gender and labor market situation among technical university graduates in Poland. Horyzonty Wychowania, 17(41): 179-189.   [Google Scholar]
  21. Van Bavel J (2012). The reversal of gender inequality in education, union formation and fertility in Europe. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 10: 127-154.   [Google Scholar]
  22. Vinokurova N (2015). Sustainable entrepreneurship and women in science and education: gender equality, gender inequality. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 2(4): 220-232.   [Google Scholar]
  23. Watson P (1992). Gender relations, education and social change in Poland. Gender and Education, 4(1-2): 127-147.   [Google Scholar]
  24. WBG (2021a). School enrollment, tertiary, female (% gross). World Bank Group, Washington, USA.  
  25. WBG (2021b). Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 women ages 15-19). World Bank Group, Washington, USA.  
  26. WBG (2021c). Fertility rate, total (births per woman). World Bank Group, Washington, USA.  
  27. WBG (2021d). School enrollment, primary (gross), gender parity index (GPI). World Bank Group, Washington, USA.  
  28. WBG (2021e). School enrollment, secondary (gross), gender parity index (GPI). World Bank Group, Washington, USA. 
  29. WBG (2021f). School enrollment, tertiary (gross), gender parity index (GPI). World Bank Group, Washington, USA. 
  30. WBG (2021g). Employment in agriculture, female (% of female employment) (modeled ILO estimate). World Bank Group, Washington, USA. 
  31. Winkelmann H, van den Heuvel-Panhuizen M, and Robitzsch A (2008). Gender differences in the mathematics achievements of German primary school students: Results from a German large-scale study. ZDM– Mathematics Education, 40(4): 601-616.   [Google Scholar]